California lawmakers reject GMO labeling bill

A label on a bag of popcorn indicates it is a non-GMO food product, in Los Angeles, California (AFP Photo / Robyn Beck) / AFP

The California Senate rejected on Wednesday a bill that would require labels on genetically-engineered foods. This is the second time in two years that labeling legislation has fallen short in the most populous and agriculturally-productive state.

Senate Bill 1381 fell short of passage by just two votes in the
40-member chamber. The bill’s sponsor, Democratic Sen. Noreen
Evans, said she would attempt to convince Senate leaders to bring
a reconsideration vote on Thursday, according to the Sacramento Bee, before the
legislative session ends on Friday.

The measure would demand all distributors who sell food in the
state to label their products if any of the ingredients were made
with genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). The bill
excludes alcohol and food sold at farmers markets.

The labeling bill was supported by organic food producers and
environmental organizations. It is opposed by powerful
agribusiness and biotechnology companies, such as multinational
corporations Monsanto and Dow, as well as major grocers,
retailers, chambers of commerce, and non-organic food growers.

Supporters of labeling laws point to unknown dangers to human and
environmental health that lurk in the manipulation of the genetic
makeup of crops like soy and corn, as well as the power over the
world’s food supply that GMO seeds represent for agribusiness
giants.

But opponents of labeling laws insist GMOs are safe and allow
science to address a growing population amid deteriorating
environmental conditions such as those caused by climate change.

In 2012, Monsanto and company spent $46 million to kill Proposition 37, a California ballot initiative
that would have mandated GMO labeling.

A similar ballot initiative in Washington state failed last fall, as many of the same anti-labeling
corporate behemoths flooded the campaign with a total of $22
million – nearly three times as much as supporters could raise –
in convincing the state’s constituents they should vote against
the mandatory labeling of GMO foods.

In April, Vermont became the first US state to pass a labeling law. Connecticut and Maine also have labeling laws,
though they only go into effect if and when surrounding states
also pass similar laws. GMO labeling is required in 64 countries,
including the European Union. Russia recently barred the import of GMO products.

Powerful food industry and biotechnology players are currently
banding together on many fronts to protect
their investment in GMO technology despite national and
international pushback. Their main effort in the US is seen in
federal legislation that would block states from passing mandatory GMO labeling measures
like Vermont’s, despite the “right to know” movement’s rising popularity.

Polling suggests over 90 percent of Americans would prefer
GMO ingredients in consumables to be labeled to some extent.

The claim that genetically-engineered food poses no risk to human
and environmental health is farfromsettled, despite the industry's assertions.

In October, 93 international scientists said
there was a lack of empirical and scientific evidence to support
what they said were false claims made by the biotech industry
about a so-called “consensus” on GMO safety. They said
more independent research is needed, as existing studies that say
GMOs are safe are overwhelmingly funded and supported by biotech
companies.

GMO crops are now grown in 28 countries, or on 12 percent of the
world's arable land, with the acreage doubling every five years.
However, in the European Union, only two GMO varieties (compared
to 96 in the USA) have so far been licensed for commercial
harvesting.

GMOs have been in the food supply since the 1990s, and are
included in roughly 70 to 80 percent of products available to
American consumers, according to food manufacturers. The most
widely used GMO crops in the US are corn, soybeans, and canola.